Skip to content

Conversation

thecrypticace
Copy link
Contributor

A variant written like this wouldn't be suggested:

@custom-variant foo {
  @slot;
}

This is because it generates no additional selectors / at rules. These don't really make much sense but they're still technically valid so should still be available in completions.

@@ -692,7 +692,7 @@ defineTest({
// ^
let completion = await document.completions({ line: 0, character: 23 })

expect(completion?.items.length).toBe(19236)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This seems like a very reasonable change, lol

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I know right? lololol

@thecrypticace thecrypticace force-pushed the feat/no-skip-empty-variants branch from bef0c1e to c7995ae Compare May 13, 2025 15:59
@thecrypticace thecrypticace merged commit f425059 into main May 13, 2025
12 checks passed
@thecrypticace thecrypticace deleted the feat/no-skip-empty-variants branch May 13, 2025 16:11
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants